5D mk 3 or 6D for first full frame

6D for anything but moving things. If you shoot moving things then get the 5D3.

6D is a very capable machine even w/ portraits. Just not for moving things.... period.

My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....My Gear Archive

I love my 6D, image quality is amazing and for most stuff it's a great camera... But to be honest the 5D3 would be a better all round camera.I have got into wildlife photography and some action stuff and the 6D doesn't quite cut it. 5D3 is a more capable camera in my eyes.

The image quality from the 6D is excellent, in the same performance class as the 5D3 and 1DX. Its shortcoming is definitely the AF system, especially with faster lenses. It's OK for portraiture, but I do get a higher keeper rate (nailing critical focus) when using bodies that have spot AF. For landscape, the 6D is great, night or day. If that will be the majority of your shooting, it's a strong argument for putting the several hundred dollar difference into lenses. I don't even use AF for landscape shots.

Thanks for the help with this. Really have to do some more research, again pointing out my main concern was the AF on the 6D but Iv'e also heard although its only one cross point that it fairs well. And I really do need some glass to go with the full frame so I like the idea of using the difference to get a nice L zoom as some of my main zoom lens are EF-S and mostly just the primes will switch over.

Jackstens, if you can afford a 5dmk3 there is no denial that it will be a universal machine for everything for many years to come. The 6d can capture moments but there is so much more to improve in that camera body. Trust me I know since my 5dmk2 is similar to the 6d however it's less capable in low light but it does have a 1/8000 max shutter speed that I truly appreciate over 1/4000 of the 6d.

I shot for many years using the 5dmk2. I did capture tonnes of photos but the 5dmk3 has put the 5dmk2 to severe shame in AF. Once you acclimate to such incredible AF the 6d and 5dmk2 really sticks out as primitive AF. The old 40D even destroys the 6d in AF.

When the Canon 5d4 hits the market it will be substantially more than a current 5d3. If and when a 6dmk2 comes out I cannot foresee this happening as the 5d3 is still the most current 5d series on the market unless you want high res of the 5ds or 5dsR.

IF a person buys a 5d3 as their first Canon full frame I'd find it hard to believe that same person would jump for a 5d4 immediately. As we all know Canon is slow on "bells and whistles" on their new bodies so I'd be shocked if they greatly improved the 5d4 over the 5d3.

If your into slow moving subjects you'll feel at home using the 6d. Semi challenging photo shoots the 6d will do well. The 5d3 just makes any fast pace stressful events much more tolerable reassuring more keepers.

Regardless of first full frame or not....it'll be very unlikely that you'd get buyers remorse (except thinner wallet). With a 6d I can see anyone wanting more if action photography is requested from you.

I would second AlanU's comments. Before I bought the 5D3 I did ponder the 6D as it was only for social/wedding backup. The one card slot first threw me off the 6D, then talking to the guys in the camera shop (who do know their kit well) we discussed what else I did and after talking sports the 5D3 came out top - ok, twice the price £2k instead of £1k for the 6D but I've easily got something that will cover my sports as well as weddings and social work.

jackstens wrote in post #17980465Really have to do some more research, again pointing out my main concern was the AF on the 6D but Iv'e also heard although its only one cross point that it fairs well.

It is only one crosspoint . . . but it is a really, really good one. It focuses at -3EV. It will focus through some ND filters (which is another thing that makes it great for landscape work), providing the light reduction on the ND filter isn't too crazy. I'll try to test that today to see at what point it can't focus through the ND.

But, as for the other focus points, I do really feel it is best just to forget that they exist.

Edit: With the limited max shutter speed of 1/4000 sec, you'd probably eventually want to add a two or three stop ND filter to your kit to overcome that limitation on really bright days if you purchased the 6D. I personally really don't ever want to wind up above f11, and sometimes I need to block some light to slow things down enough to get 1/4000; f11; ISO 200. The 5D3 has a max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec, which gives a touch more wiggle room before an ND is needed.

For stills I've never had a problem with the outer af points. I bought the 50d when it first came out which has 9 all cross type af points but my keeper rate was much lower than the 6d.

If you think you will be shooting erratic moving objects then the 6d won't be nailing every single one in a sequence. If your going out and about and just shooting what looks interesting then the 6d will do fine.

If you want to guarantee perfect in detail sharp eye focus without any misses then Sony's newer a7 series are even better.

It really depends on what you shoot. You didn't list one thing in your opening statement that says you need top of the line af. So spending an extra grand for something that would be accomplished by something a lot cheaper just doesn't make sense

Talley wrote in post #179796996D for anything but moving things. If you shoot moving things then get the 5D3.

6D is a very capable machine even w/ portraits. Just not for moving things.... period.

Spoken like someone who has never touched a 6D. This may be getting a bit repetitive, but I put my 6D's AI-Servo AF up against that of the 7D. In case you are wondering, I owned both at the same time. The 6D is significantly more responsive than the 7D. The limitation of the 6D is: center point only. The peripheral points on the 6D just suck at AI-Servo: too few, and too far apart. The AF of the 7D is way more configurable. If you can keep the center point on target, the 6D is the better choice. The 6D is not the best choice for moving targets. Neither is it a slouch.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #17980146Well not really true there... it's adequate for moving things... just not ideal. It can get the job done with practice... depending on the job.

I have 15,000 shots on my 6D. I couldn't agree with you more. Which is why I bought a 1DIII.

Latest registered member is Fotogirl18806 guests, 426 members onlineSimultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.